[IGFmaglist] suggested workshop grading scale descriptions - merging of proposals

Ljupco Gjorgjinski Ljupco.Gjorgjinski at mfa.gov.mk
Tue Apr 14 09:05:41 EDT 2015

+1 on the tick box idea.

Also, I repeat my thoughts from last year: we should aim for about 60, max 70 workshops... Even 100 is too many. Merging can lead to some curation on our part and hence a more focused and fruitful discussion.


From: Igfmaglist [mailto:igfmaglist-bounces at intgovforum.org] On Behalf Of Flavio Rech Wagner
Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 2:57 PM
To: igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
Subject: Re: [IGFmaglist] suggested workshop grading scale descriptions - merging of proposals

Dear Susan

Regarding the merging of proposals, I don't think we should consider the option "should be merged with another" in the same grading scale from 1 to 5.

If, as an example, a proposal receives scores 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, and 4 from six different MAG members, its final average score is 2.5. This does not mean, however, that people agree that this proposal has a good potential to be merged with some other proposal, since potential for merging can be evaluated acoording to different criteria.

I would prefer to have a "tick box" in addition to the score, whereby evaluators could indicate that the proposal, independently from the score it receives, has a good potential to be merged.



Dear MAG colleagues,

Based upon input from the last virtual meeting, how do the following grading scale descriptions sit with everyone?

1 = proposal has serious problems
2 = should not be accepted
(2.5 = should be merged with another)
3 = borderline
4 = could be accepted
5 = must be accepted

Please don't hesitate to share your thoughts.


Susan Chalmers
susan at chalmers.associates<mailto:susan at chalmers.associates>



Igfmaglist mailing list

Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org<mailto:Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org>


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://intgovforum.org/pipermail/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org/attachments/20150414/2b4e0211/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Igfmaglist mailing list